LA reducing EHCP support before secondary transfer for autistic daughter

[Senmater]

Long term poster but name changed for privacy for this

My DD is in year 6 and has an EHCP due to autism and ADHD. She has a full time 1:1. Since having a 1:1 for the past year, she has done really well. I have letters from previous schools asking for a 1:1, and there were times where she had a 1:1, but unfunded. It is currently fully funded via her EHCP. The EHCP does not explicitly state a 1:1 but it has so much in section F that no school would take her without a 1:1 (nearly 20 were consulted).

Now we have a big transition looming, the LA wants to change 1:1 to 'access to a named adult on demand', and take away nearly all the provision in section F.

They have named a school due to it being the only one state school who didn't refuse my child. This school is poorly performing and very undersubscribed, which I think is the only reason they are willing to take her, rather than actually being able to meet need.

I have asked them what provision they would make, and they said they have 'some TAs' and my daughter could try to find someone if she needed help. In short, no support, and a completely unreasonable expectation for a neurodiverse 11 year old girl.

The current school is bizarrely siding with the LA and saying that as the 1:1 is sat next to my daughter only 80% of the time, she doesn't 'have a 1:1'. They however do receive funding for a 1:1 for her, and were explicit that they wouldn't take her without one.

My daughter's needs are such that 3 special schools and one autism resource provision have refused her as 'unable to meet needs', however now the LA wants her to attend a mainstream without any meaningful support. Of note, this isn't even the nearest secondary, and is some distance from our home. The LA have also been explicit that they will not provide transport, despite my child having a blue badge due to her frequent dysregulated behaviour.

I will not be sending my child there as they would not be able to meet needs, and it would be a safeguarding concern given my daughter has a history of self harm and would be completely unsupervised in a large school setting.

What should I do? Should I just keep her home from the start of year 7, if we do not have our tribunal/a resolution sooner?

Have you already submitted a BFI appeal? If not, you should do that ASAP. While the aim is to hear phase transition appeals in the summer term, there won’t be enough court time to hear them all, so the longer you leave it to submit an appeal, the more likely it is that the case will be heard after the start of the 26/27 academic year.

You don’t have to send DD to the school. The naming of school in the EHCP doesn’t automatically register DD at the school. If DD is unable to attend (not just because it isn’t your preference) the LA has a duty to provide provision under section 19 of the Education Act 1996. The LA is also still responsible for anything in F (more about this below. Or you can decide to EHE whilst waiting if you wish.

The provision DD requires needs to be detailed, specified and quantified in F. If it is, it must be provided and can be enforced. It wouldn’t be up to the school to decide what bits to provide and what not to.

Primary schools providing 1:1 without it being detailed, specified and quantified in F is a common problem. Then the child coming unstuck n transition to secondary where 1:1 isn’t officially recorded as SEP in the EHCP.

Unfortunately, if 1:1 isn’t detailed, specified and quantified in F, it doesn’t have to be provided.

'access to a named adult on demand' is too vague and woolly. ‘Access to’ makes it meaningless. What ‘adult’? All DC in schools have access to an adult on demand.

It isn’t as simple as state schools getting to refuse a place. For schools that are not wholly independent, you don’t need an offer of a place. Your preferred placement must be named unless the LA can prove one of the lawful exceptions in section 39 of the Children and Families Act 2014.

If you decide to send DD, apply for transport and challenge a refusal. Transport isn’t optional in the case you describe.

Thank you, I submitted the BFI nearly a month ago but I still haven't heard regarding a date. I tried calling the tribunals service and they said they will not even talk to me as it hasn't been 20 working days yet. I am very worried that it won't be heard before September, as you say.

My DD is really struggling with the uncertainty and is refusing food as a result, which is a real concern.

Start looking at building your case. Consider if you need independent assessments. Think about submitting SARs to the current school, named school, preferred school, LA, any other professional involved.

Thank you for the advice. I have independent reports and have submitted a SAR to the LA (who incidentally withheld most of the school rejection letters). I'll send a SAR to the current and named schools, I didn't think of that

Hi
so we had this challenge recently, section F can not be changed unless section B has changed. To change section F they woukd need to change section B and to do that they would need updated Ed psych reports and assessments to say “
there is a change in need “
the change of section F would not make it through tribunal if you can prove that the section B that section F was based off had not changed.

Not in the OP’s case, where the LA has removed provision just because they don’t want to provide it, but sometimes F does need amending even if the need in B still exists. Sometimes the provision DC require to meet needs changes despite the need being the same.

There is no updated EP report from the council. They want to remove everything that is from their own EP report, without doing any repeat assessment.

they would need to evidence why. If there is no change to section B with no additional new evidence.

Yes, content is based no evidence. I wasn’t saying it wasn’t. My point was it isn’t quite correct to say that in order to amend F, section B has to have changed. There are times F can be and is lawfully amended even when B isn’t.

Their argument appears to be 'she is doing well with 1:1 support, so let's take away all support'. Unfortunately the current school appears to be supporting the council on this. Does the council pressure schools to back them on reducing support?

How long has she got left with the school. If she is moving on to secondary school I don’t see any reason as to why the current school would say this without reason to believe it.

She has one term left at primary, before secondary transition.

The primary requested, and is receiving funding for full time 1:1. They are continuing to receive it, but saying that she won't need it in secondary. This is despite her not being able to cope in a normal sized 2 form primary, and secondary obviously being a much bigger transition.